Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Servant Corps]

Sometimes, for better or for worse, we tend to look at huge news events (like the shooting in Tempe) and tend to minimize or forget about lots of other "minor" new stories that also lead to death. I don't really like that. As a way to hopefully stop that, I'll try to showcase a few stories of deaths that occur, maybe in order to remind us of our own mortality, maybe to raise the question of why American media downplay these incidents, I don't know.

Today, on Jan. 10, 2010:
*16 people died in an Nigerian Bus Crash
*Three Prisoners Died In Scotland Prisons In The Space of Two Days
*13 People Die From The Cold In India
*Two College Students and an Eldery Person Died in Seperate Road Accidents; None of them were wearing helmets
*Two People Died In A New Zealand Crash
*30 people died in violence in the disputed region of Abyei, between South Sudan and Sudan
*4 Die When Train Hits SUV in USA

[G-Flex]

the question of why American media downplay these incidents

Dog bites man, not news. That's why.

A lot of terrible things happen that are also incredibly mundane and not really worth being focused on very much. How many murders happen across the globe in a day? I don't know. Obviously, they're important to those surrounding them, but in the "global news" sense, they aren't worth focus at all except collectively.

[Aqizzar]

...maybe to raise the question of why American media downplay these incidents, I don't know.

What.  There's only so many hours of new broadcast in the day and space on the page.  Why would American media report all day on a Congresswoman in Arizona being shot instead of two people dieing in a road accident in New Zealand?  Take a wild guess.

[G-Flex]

Why would they report on a Congresswoman in Arizona being shot instead of two people dieing in a road accident in New Zealand?  Take a wild guess.

I know that's just a rhetorical question and wasn't aimed at me, but to make the point more clear: It's because one incident has political ramifications and is an unusual occurrence, whereas the other incident is entirely mundane and not indicative of very much of interest, and is the kind of thing that happens all the time.

[woose1]

Yeah, I have to agree with Aqizzar and G-Flex. The shooting in Arizona was hyped for a couple of reasons; It's currently under investigation as an attempted assassination. In addition, a young child was shot and killed, and the shooting happened in the US, rather than a politically ambiguous place like Sudan.

[Servant Corps]

...maybe to raise the question of why American media downplay these incidents, I don't know.

What.  There's only so many hours of new broadcast in the day and space on the page.  Why would American media report all day on a Congresswoman in Arizona being shot instead of two people dieing in a road accident in New Zealand?  Take a wild guess.

Problem is that people focus so much on the Congresswoman in Arizona that it makes her life (and the lives of those six people that died in the AZ shooting) far more important and interesting than, I don't know, the 16 people who got killed in Nigeria.

Essentially, this shooting has been seen as so important and deserving of attention, including two topics in the USA and a call for many people to change our ENTIRE rhetoric...that it could potentially blind us to other incidents that may also be deserving of attention. I don't want to see certain "bad" events be downplayed or ignored, lest this means we focus on a spectacle and not on something really important.

[G-Flex]

Problem is that people focus so much on the Congresswoman in Arizona that it makes her life (and the lives of those six people that died in the AZ shooting) far more important and interesting than, I don't know, the 16 people who got killed in Nigeria.

Essentially, this shooting has been seen as so important and deserving of attention, including two topics in the USA and a call for many people to change our ENTIRE rhetoric...that it could potentially blind us to other incidents that may also be deserving of attention. I don't want to see certain "bad" events be downplayed or ignored, lest this means we focus on a spectacle and not on something really important.

It's not news because her life was more important. It's news because the event surrounding her death has, on an individual level, greater implications and need for consideration. Yes, people dying in bus crashes is important, but no particular bus crash has a great need for international consideration unless it has implications going beyond the single incident, since stuff like that happens every day and there isn't much to be gained by doing so.

Oh, and in case you forgot, the congresswoman wasn't the only one who got shot.

[Aqizzar]

Essentially, this shooting has been seen as so important and deserving of attention, including two topics in the USA and a call for many people to change our ENTIRE rhetoric...that it could potentially blind us to other incidents that may also be deserving of attention. I don't want to see certain "bad" events be downplayed or ignored, lest this means we focus on a spectacle and not on something really important.

I'm sorry, but that's just not a response.  Every person's death is a tragedy.  But the circumstances of every person's death is not of equal importance.  That any one person died is not necessarily important at all.  You might think this is crass, but yes, I do believe that the attempted assassination of a member of Congress is more newsworthy in the United States than a sectarian gunfight in Sudan or a few prisoners dieing in Scotland by unknown means.  The event refers to her near-death instead of any other tragedy of the event because that was the first thing known and reported, and the clear intent of the perpetrator - the other people who died make it an even greater tragedy worthy of note.  I would go so far as to say that people who weren't famous for anything and then die in accidents or weather are a story of local import and nothing more.

[G-Flex]

I would go so far as to say that people who weren't famous for anything and then die in accidents or weather are a story of local import and nothing more.

This isn't to say that people dying in car crashes or in jails aren't important, just that the individual deaths themselves aren't newsworthy. There's a difference between caring how many people die in car crashes, and caring about every one individually.

[Sowelu]

People are concerned when the political climate shifts in a way that's related to violence.  When we go from "people are not shooting representatives" to "people are shooting representatives", that is a major shift that needs attention.

If a horrible multi-car wreck happens and ten people die, well, we all knew that kind of thing could happen.  If a new model of car turns out to have bad brakes and ten people die, that's news because it's relevant to us; it is new information that could be life-or-death to us personally.  School shootings are important because they are new and unexpected, and they make you want to think "What would I do in this situation".  Attempted assassinations of political figures make you wonder if violent subversives that have suddenly sprung up that could endanger us or our families.

Floods or malaria kill hundreds?  We already know that they are dangerous.  People die in prison?  We're not in prison.  Sectarian violence in another country--might be big news there, but it has no impact on our lives personally.  And they are not CHANGES to the status quo.

[Aqizzar]

Basically, just remember: it's called "news".  Sectarian violence in Sudan?  Not new.  People die when vehicles crash?  Not new.  Long term bad weather is dangerous to the unprotected?  Not new.  Crazy dude shoots an elected official and then bystanders?  New.  And if it ain't new, it ain't news.

I think it says a lot that of the six people who died, only the nine year old girl and the Federal judge are mentioned or known of, let alone the eleven people injured.

As Ricky Gervais put it, if he died in a plane crash, the headline would be, "Ricky Gervais, 213 others, die in plane crash".

[Servant Corps]

I don't want this thread to go in the same route as Nikov's thread, and I don't know if I can make my thoughts coherent enough...but...I'm going to try.

The fact that we 'normalize' certain terrible, disastrous events (oh people die in traffic accidents, oh well) is not good in the slightest. We are more likely to die in a car accident than we are to die from the Lone Wolf. But with so much media attention dedicated to this Lone Wolf, we'd be more likely to expend resources, change our way of life, and do whatever it takes just to make sure this doesn't happen again. Meanwhile, we do nothing to deal with these 'normal' events, which overall, would kill people and do more damage than the news incident we are reacting to.

Obviously, this shooting is an important news event and we must prevent future occurrances; but we have other important news events too. If we spend more resources to prevent traffic accidents, long term weather, or violence in Sudan, we could overall save more lives and prevent more damage. If we believe that these incidents are normal and not worthy of consideration, it will continue to plague us forever and ever as a long-term cancer.

[ECrownofFire]

One quote summarizes this all perfectly. No idea who said it, but it's been falsely attributed to everyone from Hitler to Stalin (mostly Stalin).

"A single death is a tragedy; a million deaths is a statistic."

[Sir Pseudonymous]

In addition, a young child was shot and killed

I hate how whenever a kid gets caught up in something like that it's always harped on about to the exclusion, or near exclusion, of everyone else involved. The only reason the congresswoman is being mentioned at all is because she's a congresswoman, while everyone else is practically ignored in favor of talking about how tragic some kid getting killed is. As though society having invested significantly less resources feeding, educating, and otherwise supporting the individual somehow makes them more important than those who've had decades of training, socialization, and support. In addition, children are produced as a generally unwanted consequence of recreation, and there are literally more of them than are wanted. An adult is generally far more valuable than a child in terms of their benefiting society, and their loss is significantly greater, due to all that society has invested in them over the years. Trying to paint the child's death as the real tragedy is either a case of a foolish kneejerk reaction, bullshit sensationalist journalism, or just paying lipservice to the fact that everyone else is doing it, so that one doesn't stand out as "cold" or somesuch.

What makes a federal judge less important than a child who has yet to finish their first half-decade of schooling?

we'd be more likely to ... change our way of life, and do whatever it takes just to make sure this doesn't happen again.

In this case, I believe all that's being asked is that certain public figures shut the fuck up with their violent revolutionary rhetoric, something which has been said for so long people have given up trying to convince them not to be such giant fuckwads, and this happens to demonstrate exactly what happens if someone were to actually listen to, and enact, their bullshit calls to arms, whether or not this particular nutjob was one of the ones in their pocket or not.

If we spend more resources to prevent ... long term weather ... we could overall save more lives and prevent more damage.

How do you suggest we prevent weather? Nuke the sky?

If we spend more resources to prevent ... violence in Sudan, we could overall save more lives and prevent more damage.

Except Sudan is 100% irrelevant to anything anyone in the US gives a damn about, and so none of our concern. We have neither the desire not the responsibility to intervene, wasting our resources and looking even more like global meddlers. The lives of people who do not effect us in any way aren't worth nearly as much as the lives of the soldiers that would be required to intervene, and so intervening would bring exactly no benefits to anyone but people who are irrelevant to the world as a whole.

[G-Flex]

People die in prison?  We're not in prison.  Sectarian violence in another country--might be big news there, but it has no impact on our lives personally.

I agree with the other points, but not these. How prisoners are treated should be relevant to us, as should the political climate of the world in general (to a degree).

The fact that we 'normalize' certain terrible, disastrous events (oh people die in traffic accidents, oh well) is not good in the slightest.

It's not like we think those are good things, it just isn't news to anyone that they happen. If there's some particularly dangerous problem related to cars, or roads, or anything else, or something that can make the situation better, then that is news because these things do matter, but isolated incidents don't except to those involved and as footnotes and statistics.

Meanwhile, we do nothing to deal with these 'normal' events, which overall, would kill people and do more damage than the news incident we are reacting to.

Obviously, this shooting is an important news event and we must prevent future occurrances; but we have other important news events too.

Again, people dying in car accidents is worth preventing, which is why we do this. We have massive campaigns around here to prevent drunk driving, automobile recalls are big business, and so forth. What isn't newsworthy is a single accident with nothing spectacular about it, because it provides nobody with any new information about anything.

If we spend more resources to prevent traffic accidents, long term weather, or violence in Sudan, we could overall save more lives and prevent more damage. If we believe that these incidents are normal and not worthy of consideration, it will continue to plague us forever and ever as a long-term cancer.

Yet again, nobody thinks these things aren't worthy of consideration. It's that individual, expected examples of them aren't.